222.30
Fraudulent asset conversions.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
222.30 Fraudulent asset conversions.—
(1) As used in this section, “conversion” means every mode, direct or indirect, absolute or conditional, of changing or disposing of an asset, such that the products or proceeds of the asset become immune or exempt by law from claims of creditors of the debtor and the products or proceeds of the asset remain property of the debtor. The definitions of chapter 726 apply to this section unless the application of a definition would be unreasonable.
(2) Any conversion by a debtor of an asset that results in the proceeds of the asset becoming exempt by law from the claims of a creditor of the debtor is a fraudulent asset conversion as to the creditor, whether the creditor’s claim to the asset arose before or after the conversion of the asset, if the debtor made the conversion with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud the creditor.
(3) In an action for relief against a fraudulent asset conversion, a creditor may obtain:
(a) Avoidance of the fraudulent asset conversion to the extent necessary to satisfy the creditor’s claim.
(b) An attachment or other provisional remedy against the asset converted in accordance with applicable law.
(c) Subject to applicable principles of equity and in accordance with applicable rules of civil procedure:
1. An injunction against further conversion by the debtor of the asset or of other property.
2. Any other relief the circumstances may require.
(4) If a creditor has obtained a judgment on a claim against the debtor, the creditor, if the court so orders, may levy execution on the asset converted or its proceeds.
(5) A cause of action with respect to a fraudulent asset conversion is extinguished unless an action is brought within 4 years after the fraudulent asset conversion was made.
(6) If an asset is converted and the converted asset is subsequently transferred to a third party, the provisions of chapter 726 apply to the transfer to the third party.
History.—s. 5, ch. 93-256.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 45
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1994–2023 · leading case: Bank Leumi Trust Co. of New York v. Lang
Bank Leumi Trust Co. of New York v. Lang (1995)
“This statute is part of the chapter which now includes Fla.Stat. § 222.30. § 222.30 provides that any conversion of non-exempt assets to exempt assets is a fraudulent asset conversion if the debtor made the conversion with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud the creditor.”
Mehdipour v. Rensin (In re Rensin) (2019)
“Relying on Fla. Stat. § 222.30 , the plaintiff argues that the assets of the Joren Trust, including the annuities, and any funds in the Regions Bank checking account, are not exempt assets as they are the product of fraudulent conversion of non-exempt assets into exempt assets.”
Havoco of America, Ltd. v. Hill (2001)
“Section 222.30, Florida Statutes (2000), provides in pertinent part: 222.”
Hinton v. Hinton (In Re Hinton) (2007)
“29, and Florida Statute Section 222.30) (pertaining to fraudulent asset conversions); Adv.”
In Re Wilbur (1997)
“Yet, other courts have held that a homestead exemption will not be disallowed even upon a finding of fraud under Fla.Stat. 222.30. See, e.g., In re. Clements, 194 B.”
Meininger v. Miller (In Re Miller) (1995)
“14 *309 is part of the Chapter which also includes Fla.Stat. § 222.30. This is a recent amendment which became effective October 1,1993.”
In Re Mathews (2007)
“Fla. Stat. Ann. § 222.30 (2) (West 2005).”
Spector v. Spector (2017)
“Similarly, section 222.30, Florida Statutes (2015), removes property from the statutory exemption if a conversion by the debtor resulted in the property becoming exempt.”
Ameritrust National Bank v. Davidson (In Re Davidson) (1995)
“In overruling Plaintiffs’ objection to Debtors’ claimed Annuity exemption, the Bankruptcy Court focused on the fact that Florida Statute § 222.30 was not in effect at the time the Annuity was purchased.”
Crews v. First Colony Life Insurance (In Re Barker) (1994)
“See Fla. StatAnn. § 222.30 (West 1993). In light of these remedies, the Court rejects the approach taken previously by the court in In re Schwarb, 150 B.”
In Re Hendricks (1999)
“Fla.Stat. § 222.30 simply provides that the protection of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act applies to asset conversions as well.”
Luzinski v. Peabody & Arnold LLP (In Re Gosman) (2007)
“Gosman as tenants by the entireties violated the Florida Fraudulent Asset Conversion Statute, Section 222.30, Florida Statutes. 48. On March 1, 2005, pursuant to the Opinion, the Court entered judgment avoiding the transfers and ordering a turn over to the Trustee and awarding…”
— 222.30(1) — 1 case
In Re Wilbur (1997)
“Yet, other courts have held that a homestead exemption will not be disallowed even upon a finding of fraud under Fla.Stat. 222.30. See, e.g., In re. Clements, 194 B.”
— 222.30(2) — 7 cases
In Re Mathews (2007)
“Fla. Stat. Ann. § 222.30 (2) (West 2005).”
In Re Tabone (2000)
In Re Thomas (1994)
Ameritrust National Bank v. Davidson (In Re Davidson) (1995)
“In overruling Plaintiffs’ objection to Debtors’ claimed Annuity exemption, the Bankruptcy Court focused on the fact that Florida Statute § 222.30 was not in effect at the time the Annuity was purchased.”
— 222.30(3) — 1 case
Welsh v. Martinez (2022)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.